trailer break: ‘An Emasculating Truth’

Are men endangered? Is masculinity on the decline? Where have all the cowboys gone, anyway?

I can’t find out anything at all about the filmmaker here, so I can’t tell whether this is going to be a progressive look at changing definitions of masculinity and manhood, or some sort of terrified rant about how the world has gone to hell since we gave women the vote and let them go to school (the PowerPoint presentation about the film available at the site as a PDF appears to indicate this is the case), or something else entirely.

What does it mean to be a man? I would say that the answer is to decide for your damned self what it means to be a man.

Nathan

What man?
Which man?
When’s a man a man?
What makes a man a man?
Am I man?
Yes.
Technically, I am.

–Jemaine Clement, Flight of the Conchords

Accounting Ninja

And that would the the sound of wailing and gnashing of teeth, as previously unquestioned privelege is being challenged and taken away bit by bit. Funny how they always blame it on women. How dare we try to seek our place as full human beings! Don’t you know you women are RUINING FOREVER men with your demands to be treated with respect, to not have emotionally distant, abusive partners, and to be thought of as as capable and intelligent as a man?!

You never hear of femininity being diminished because men are allowed to be full human beings. >:(

This is proof that men are still considered the superior gender, for all this talk of how women are now in charge and ripping the balls off the poor, poor men. Because becoming “more like a woman” is a fate worse than death! It’s even compared to the extinction of the male gender! Thanks, College Professor Guy Who Is Fucking Insane!

I thought this might be interesting too, examining what is considered masculine in our society, or researching hormone levels (possibly a very concerning thing!). But then, towards the end, it started to blame us Vagina-Americans and I was all “Dude, pleaze!”

I look forward to your review.

JSW

What is a man? A miserable pile of secrets!

But enough talk, have at you!

LaSargenta

Can you say Polychlorinated Biphenyls?

neil

Castlevania FTW.

CB

Forrest Taft (aka Steven Seagal, after beating the stuffing out of a man whose claim to manhood was “big balls”): What does it take to change the essence of a man?

And the answer, Mr. Taft, is apparently a 1% decrease in testosterone per year (on a chart with exactly 2 data points).

I mean, this has to be a joke, right? Because otherwise it’s one of the saddest things I’ve ever seen. I mean, I’m no biologist or anything, but I’m pretty sure that using hair product and denying man’s natural urge to provide by, uh, buying pre-made food(??) does not have a direct impact on testosterone production. And that wearing pants will not increase it (the Scottish didn’t seem to have any problems in that regard).

I mean if hair care products decrease testosterone, then what in the hell would the powdered wigs of Victorian England do? Wouldn’t they have had testosterone levels too low to reproduce?

But on the other hand, you have to admit, before Women’s Suffrage there were no nuclear bombs. I’m just sayin’, it makes you think.

P.S. LOL @ Ninja and “Vagina-Americans”.

doctorx0079

The real reason for the decline in manliness is that so many men waste so much time watching dumb crap on the Internet like that.

Of course there’s a shortage of real men! All these idiots do is act like immature little boys who just heard a fart joke!

The shortage is in males who know how to act like an adult… =)

Paul

I remember when I was in college, a young woman complained that she couldn’t find any “real men” at our feminist Mecca of the Midwest college, then she came back from summer vacation complaining she hadn’t found any men worth talking with back home.

I threw in the towel at fulfilling other people’s definitions quite some time ago, and I don’t blame any man or woman for doing the same.

CB: my constitutional history professor had a similiar lament: “We gave women the vote because they were supposed to be more moral than men, and who is the next guy who gets elected President? Harding.” He was a cranky 80+ year old prof who lectured without notes but with a bitter sense of humor.

MaSch

“What makes a man? Is it being prepared to do the right thing, whatever the cost? Isn’t that what makes a man?”

“Sure, that and a pair of testicles.”

The wisdom of the Dude …

LaSargenta

my constitutional history professor had a similiar lament: “We gave women the vote because they were supposed to be more moral than men, and who is the next guy who gets elected President? Harding.” He was a cranky 80+ year old prof who lectured without notes but with a bitter sense of humor.

Really? That was why women were given the vote? No, that’s the only reason HE could think of to give women the vote. Women got the vote and the reason should have been “because women are citizens and payed taxes and needed to have a voice in the government of the country in which they live” … just like men.

No taxation without representation.

If I have to live under a Rule of Law, I damn well better get a say now and then in the law.

Women are not more moral than men. Women are equally human.

akaMissK

I never took constitutional history with Paul (and Paul can certainly correct me if I am being too charitable towards his prof) but I believe the “moral” statement is more of a history joke than an actual complaint. One of the arguments at the time for women’s suffrage was that women, being more moral than men, would be a civilizing influence on politics. Hence the ironic joke: all these supposedly more moral women got a chance to vote and we got one of the most corrupt administrations in our history.

I am very happy that my foremothers fought so hard for the right to vote but some people used some rather problematic and ugly arguments. In addition to “women are more moral” it was also argued that women’s suffrage would double the number of white voters and that would be good because, you know, black people and immigrants are bad. The only tactic that should have been necessary is an argument from equality but there are still people who don’t quite get that as sufficient.

LaSargenta

@ akaMissK — Yup, I’m sure you’re right. I’m sure it was called a joke. And, yes, I see the irony (although, I suppose we could argue about the relative states of corruption of, let’s say, Grant’s, VanBuren’s, and Harding’s administrations).

The thing is, when I was studying history, before I left academia for several years and then returned to study engineering, I heard lines like this All The Time. And, if I didn’t laugh — usually my lack of laughter was due to boredom as I had heard it before the last time women’s sufferage or some other women’s rights topic came up — I got slapped with the ole’ “You feminists have no sense of humor!” line. Real knee-slapper, that one.

Now, not once, seriously, not once did I hear a male professor or grad student say “Well, just goes to show human nature.” Nor did anyguy say “About time they got the vote, they had been having to pay taxes for decades and all kind of restrictive laws were passed that directly affected their lives.”

I’m well aware of all the ugly things that were attached to women’s sufferage. Throwing around those issues as well as silly “jokes” about morality of an entire sex is a FANTASTIC red herring to distract from the basic issue.

Isobel

Ah Broxbee, you got there before me with the powdered wigs! The Victorians were definitely into hair products, though – they used macassar (sp?), basically greasy hair gel type stuff in such quantities they had to develop anti-macassars to stop the upholstery from being ruined!

akaMissK

LaSargenta: Fair enough and I think we agree on everything. I am afraid I assumed you didn’t know much about the history of the suffrage movement which probably has a lot to do with the rather apolitical people I have been working around recently. It is depressing on several levels to have to explain recent history and current political movements after you make a joke that anyone who had high school history or reads a newspaper should get. But this is an intelligent blog and I should have adjusted my assumptions!

I am rather far outside of academia and the only people I know making jokes such as Paul described are other snarky feminists who I am confident are mocking the women-are-more-moral idea and are totally on board with the woman-are-people-who-deserve-rights-just-like-male-people argument. So I likely just read my experience into the professor’s joke and assumed he was mocking the same thing my friends would. I understand the built up frustration though. I have worked in some rather male dominated industries and have perfected my neutral face with neutral sound response from all the times I have been teased that the guys could make much cruder jokes/swear more/otherwise be more comfortable if I wasn’t present at the conference table. I assure them it was funny the first hundred times I heard it.

your financial support needed

Please support truly independent film criticism as generously as you can.